BACKGROUND: Clinically relevant cutoffs are needed for the interpretation of HIV-1 phenotypic resistance estimates as predicted by "virtual" phenotype HIV resistance analysis. METHODS: Using a clinical data set containing 2596 treatment change episodes in 2217 patients in 8 clinical trials and 2 population-based cohorts, drug-specific linear regression models were developed to describe the relation between baseline characteristics (resistance, viral load, and treatment history), new treatment regimen selected, and 8-week virologic outcome. RESULTS: These models were used to derive clinical cutoffs (CCOs) for 6 nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (zidovudine, lamivudine, stavudine, didanosine, abacavir, and tenofovir), 3 unboosted protease inhibitors (PIs; indinavir, amprenavir, and nelfinavir), and 4 ritonavir-boosted PIs (indinavir/ritonavir, amprenavir/ritonavir, saquinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir). The CCOs were defined as the phenotypic resistance levels (fold change [FC]) associated with a 20% and 80% loss of predicted wild-type drug effect and depended on the drug-specific dynamic range of the assay. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed CCOs were better correlated with virologic response than were biological cutoffs and provide a relevant tool for estimating the resistance to antiretroviral drug combinations used in clinical practice. They can be applied to diverse patient populations and are based on a consistent methodologic approach to interpreting phenotypic drug resistance.
BACKGROUND: Clinically relevant cutoffs are needed for the interpretation of HIV-1 phenotypic resistance estimates as predicted by "virtual" phenotype HIV resistance analysis. METHODS: Using a clinical data set containing 2596 treatment change episodes in 2217 patients in 8 clinical trials and 2 population-based cohorts, drug-specific linear regression models were developed to describe the relation between baseline characteristics (resistance, viral load, and treatment history), new treatment regimen selected, and 8-week virologic outcome. RESULTS: These models were used to derive clinical cutoffs (CCOs) for 6 nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (zidovudine, lamivudine, stavudine, didanosine, abacavir, and tenofovir), 3 unboosted protease inhibitors (PIs; indinavir, amprenavir, and nelfinavir), and 4 ritonavir-boosted PIs (indinavir/ritonavir, amprenavir/ritonavir, saquinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir). The CCOs were defined as the phenotypic resistance levels (fold change [FC]) associated with a 20% and 80% loss of predicted wild-type drug effect and depended on the drug-specific dynamic range of the assay. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed CCOs were better correlated with virologic response than were biological cutoffs and provide a relevant tool for estimating the resistance to antiretroviral drug combinations used in clinical practice. They can be applied to diverse patient populations and are based on a consistent methodologic approach to interpreting phenotypic drug resistance.
Authors: Luke C Swenson; Jeong Eun Min; Conan K Woods; Eric Cai; Jonathan Z Li; Julio S G Montaner; P Richard Harrigan; Alejandro Gonzalez-Serna Journal: AIDS Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Jan Weber; Ana C Vazquez; Dane Winner; Justine D Rose; Doug Wylie; Ariel M Rhea; Kenneth Henry; Jennifer Pappas; Alison Wright; Nizar Mohamed; Richard Gibson; Benigno Rodriguez; Vicente Soriano; Kevin King; Eric J Arts; Paul D Olivo; Miguel E Quiñones-Mateu Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2011-05-31 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: D T Dunn; R L Goodall; P Munderi; C Kityo; M Ranopa; L Bacheler; M Van Houtte; C Gilks; P Kaleebu; D Pillay Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2011-07-18 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Esmeralda A Soares; André F Santos; Luis M Gonzalez; Matthew S Lalonde; Denis M Tebit; Amilcar Tanuri; Eric J Arts; Marcelo A Soares Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2009-08-26 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Eleftherios Michailidis; Emily M Ryan; Atsuko Hachiya; Karen A Kirby; Bruno Marchand; Maxwell D Leslie; Andrew D Huber; Yee T Ong; Jacob C Jackson; Kamalendra Singh; Eiichi N Kodama; Hiroaki Mitsuya; Michael A Parniak; Stefan G Sarafianos Journal: Retrovirology Date: 2013-06-24 Impact factor: 4.602
Authors: Luke C Swenson; Graham Pollock; Brian Wynhoven; Theresa Mo; Winnie Dong; Robert S Hogg; Julio S G Montaner; P Richard Harrigan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-02-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Atsuko Hachiya; Eiichi N Kodama; Matthew M Schuckmann; Karen A Kirby; Eleftherios Michailidis; Yasuko Sakagami; Shinichi Oka; Kamalendra Singh; Stefan G Sarafianos Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-01-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Awachana Jiamsakul; Rami Kantor; Patrick C K Li; Sunee Sirivichayakul; Thira Sirisanthana; Pacharee Kantipong; Christopher K C Lee; Adeeba Kamarulzaman; Winai Ratanasuwan; Rossana Ditangco; Thida Singtoroj; Somnuek Sungkanuparph Journal: BMC Res Notes Date: 2012-10-24